You are here

Coloplast Care Nursing and Telehealth Service

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Updated 13 January 2017

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 25 October 2016 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led? We did not carry out an unannounced inspection due to the type of service, and due to no concerns being identified during the first inspection.

Inspection areas

Safe

Updated 13 January 2017

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations. Due to the specialist nature of the service we are currently unable to rate the service. Positively we found:

  • There had been no serious incidents or never events reported in the last 12 months.
  • The mandatory training completion rate was 100% for all modules
  • There was an electronic patient record system and caseloads could be accessed at all times in all locations.
  • There were comprehensive risk assessments in place to maintain patient and staff safety.
  • Staffing levels were sufficient to meet the needs to patients by attending all appointments and clinics.
  • Safeguarding procedures were clear. Staff were appropriately trained and could access specialist safeguarding advice if required.

However we also found:

  • Infection control policies and procedures contained references that were not up to date and the service did not carry out their own hand hygiene auditing.
  • Staff could not confidently talk about the duty of candour and its meaning.

Effective

Updated 13 January 2017

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations. Due to the specialist nature of the service we are currently unable to rate this service. Positively we found:

  • There were staff competency frameworks in place.
  • There were suitable IT systems in place, which allowed staff access to information remotely.
  • The provider had processes in place for gaining patient consent appropriately.
  • There was a clearly defined referral process with strict parameters for first consultations.
  • In the majority policies and procedures reflected best practice guidance and legislation.

However:

  • There was a lack of local audit data that could demonstrate the service was providing good patient outcomes.
  • There was no formal signing off to demonstrate staff were competent with clinical competencies.

Caring

Updated 13 January 2017

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations. Due to the specialist nature of the service currently we are unable to rate this service. Positively we found:

  • We did not see patient care during our inspection; however, we spoke with two patients by telephone to ask about the care they had received. Patients informed us that their privacy and dignity was maintained by staff.
  • Patients reported that they were very happy with the way staff had cared for them. Patients reported that nurses were, ‘the most helpful person in the world’, and that the nurses provided ‘a superb service’.
  • Patients told us that staff took time to explain treatment and answer any questions or concerns that they had.

Responsive

Updated 13 January 2017

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations. Due to the specialist nature of the service currently we are unable to rate this service. Positively we found:

  • The service catered for the needs of the individual NHS trusts and CCGs dependent on the required service provision.
  • Nurses provided domiciliary visits for patients that were unable to attend clinic appointments due to circumstances.
  • There had been no delayed discharges within the service and there had been no patient re-admissions within 90 days between August 2015 and July 2016.
  • The provider had a good complaints process, and complaints were managed and responded to in a timely way.

Well-led

Updated 13 January 2017

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations. Due to the specialist nature of the service currently we are unable to rate this service. Positively we found:

  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by their immediate managers.
  • There was an open culture, staff were passionate about their roles.
  • Regular reports on the performance and running of the nursing service were submitted to the Coloplast Nursing Service board for Coloplast Limited, which meant there was sufficient senior oversight of the service.
  • The risk register was up to date with relevant and current service risks.
  • Quality assurance processes were in place, though these were limited towards patient satisfaction rather than patient outcomes.

However:

  • The format of the minutes of meetings was in an action log format. However, there was no clear detail on this of how risks were taken forward and reported on at the next meeting, or when actions were completed or closed.
Checks on specific services

Community health services for adults

Updated 13 January 2017